[Congressional Record Volume 150, Number 45 (Friday, April 2, 2004)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3621-S3622]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          ECONOMIC INDICATORS

  Mr. CORZINE. Madam President, it is good news to have an increase in 
employment in America today. Everyone is pleased to see more jobs are 
coming into our economy and Democrats, as well as Republicans, are 
pleased to see more Americans are going to work.
  But that said, working men and women, and everyone, has to understand 
numbers of 1 month do not indicate a change in whether one assesses 
economic policy working for average Americans, for middle-class 
Americans, for moderate-income Americans, for those who are trying to 
make ends meet in our economy.
  These good numbers we would like to see continued. We would like to 
see more Americans going to work, but the American people need to 
understand this number, this 1-month number, in the context of a whole 
38 months of development of economic policy in this country, is a 
record that I believe, and I think many people would believe, has put 
enormous stress on the American people.
  We are pleased with the job growth, but the fact is, we saw growth in 
the unemployed this month of about 184,000. We now have 8.4 million 
Americans unemployed in this economy. That is up substantially this 
month.
  We have also seen the unemployment rate tick up about one-tenth of a 
percent. I heard some spinning about Senator Kerry saying 5.6 was 
pretty good in 1996. There is a difference when you come from 7.2 
percent, which is where President Clinton's unemployment rate was when 
he came to office, going to 5.6--on the way, by the way, to 3.8 
percent--than when we have a 5.6 or 5.7 percent rate, coming up from 
4.2 percent, which is what the current administration inherited.
  We have rising unemployment in this country, not declining. One month 
is a good thing to have happen, even a good quarter is a good thing to 
happen, but let's put it into the context of the 38 months of the 
stewardship of this administration's economic policies.
  The fact is, we have had the worst record in 70 years, and it still 
stands. It has not been substantially altered by a 1-month performance 
in job growth in private sector jobs that we have seen since the 
Herbert Hoover years in the late 1920s and early 1930s.
  The fact is, every other President from that point in time on--
Roosevelt right through Clinton; including George Bush 1, Ronald 
Reagan, Carter--produced private sector jobs. And we have about a .7-
percent decline in jobs under this administration in the private 
sector. We have lost about 2.6 million of those jobs, even after these 
numbers.
  In fact, we have been producing more jobs in Government during the 
Presidency of someone who said they did not believe in Government--
which is quite strange--relative to an emphasis on the private sector.
  Again, I repeat, you have to look at this in the overall context. One 
month is good, and we are all pleased about that, but the fact is we 
have lost private sector jobs in this economy. It is a fact of which I 
think the American people have a real understanding.
  Economic policy is something to analyze over a period of time, in 
context. It is not just a month. Remember, in the Clinton years, there 
were roughly 21 million jobs created--21 million jobs created--over 
that 8-year period. Right now, we have lost something in the

[[Page S3622]]

neighborhood of 2.5 to 2.6 million jobs over the term of this 
stewardship of the economy.
  It is the context you have to think about, what kind of economic 
policy leads to sustained economic growth and sustained economic job 
creation, which is the end result that I think people will measure in 
their own lives--whether they have a job, whether they are working, 
whether they are actually able to take care of their families.
  By the way, it is not just jobs; it is actually the earnings one gets 
on those jobs. One of the things that has been happening in our job 
market is, as people lose a job, and then they take another job, we 
have seen a 21-percent decline in the average wages of people who get 
reemployed.
  So those factory workers in Edison, NJ, where our last Ford factory 
was closed--they go from a Ford manufacturing job to a service sector 
job that is, on average, 21 percent lower in real earnings than the job 
they had before. So they may be working but going into a Wal-Mart or 
going into hamburger flipping, which is not as good a job as the ones 
we are losing.
  That is the problem in this economy, even though we might be seeing 
job growth. By the way, if you look at the actual numbers in this 
month's job creation, so many of them are in the service sector, where 
you are seeing this phenomenon happening, where there is a decline in 
the earnings of families and their purchasing power. They are losing 
their ability to go into the economy and have the strength to 
participate in the way they were before.
  So it is not just the jobs; it is the quality of jobs that is at 
stake in the debate we have with regard to economic policy. So not only 
do we have a poor performance with regard to job creation, we have poor 
performance with regard to the quality and the earnings power that is 
associated with those jobs.
  I think it is hard to hear some of the celebration and spinning that 
I have heard this morning on some of the television stations and from 
others who are focusing only on the good news of the 308,000 jobs 
created. That is great. How about the 184,000 people who lost their 
jobs? How about the 8.4 million people who are unemployed? How about 
the 2 million people who are on long-term unemployment in this country, 
who are detached or who have dropped out and are not looking for jobs? 
It is the highest number we have ever seen.

  By the way, if you added that into the unemployment rate--the people 
who have stopped looking because they have given up hope looking for a 
job--the unemployment rate would be 7.2 percent. This is not just a 
single number. I know there is going to be a lot of focus on it, and 
that is a good thing. I hope it sustains itself over a long period of 
time so we can start correcting this malaise we have in our jobs market 
around this country. And it is serious.
  People know about outsourcing. They know about offshoring. They know 
about the fact that the minimum wage has not increased so that real 
earnings can grow for working men and women in America. There is a real 
problem.
  In January 2001, we had about 700,000 long-term unemployed. Today, we 
have 2 million. You tell me whether that is a good stewardship of our 
economic policy and our jobs policy in this country. Where I come from 
that does not sound like a good performance.
  I saw one of my esteemed colleagues from the other side of the 
aisle--I know he was trying to make a positive case--saying we have 
record employment at 138.4 million jobs in this country. That may be 
true, but last time I checked the population just keeps growing every 
month. Every month, the population keeps growing. If the employment 
rate does not go up, do you know what. What happens this week or what 
happened in this month's numbers is exactly what is taking place. We 
get rising unemployment, particularly when you add in all those people 
who have dropped out of the workforce. It is not that hard to do 
fractions. If you keep the base the same, and the numbers go up, you 
are going to get a changed number. And that is what is happening. It is 
hard for me to understand why we want to take victory laps when there 
are 8.4 million Americans without jobs.
  Now, this is something we all hope turns and continues along the 
path. By the way, it is sure coming at a fairly serious price. The last 
time I checked, the President's own OMB Director was projecting we are 
going to have a $540 billion budget deficit. I guess if you go out with 
a credit card and spend up a storm, you can get some activity going on 
in the marketplace. If you go to the malls and spend until you are in 
debt to the point where you cannot sustain it over a long period of 
time, you can get some economic stimulus, but that does not mean that 
is good economic policy. In fact, that means we are mortgaging our 
children's future so we can get results now. Funny, we want results 
about 6 months in front of an election, but we are spending in an 
uncontrolled manner, and almost everyone, on both sides of the aisle, 
is troubled. Spending and tax cuts and borrowing just make no sense, 
but they are getting some results in stimulating the economy. I do 
think we have a good thing going on with regard to the Federal Reserve. 
We have had the lowest interest rates now for 15, 16, 17 months--the 
lowest interest rates in 45 years. That actually does put some stimulus 
in the economy.
  We could not do any more with regard to trying to stimulate. The 
problem is, we did not do it very efficiently. We put it in all at the 
top income brackets, and it sort of trickles down.
  And that may create jobs. But I want to go back to what I think maybe 
is as important as anything that needs to be analyzed in the job 
market. When we trade manufacturing jobs, white collar technology jobs, 
for service sector jobs, what happens to the American people? Their 
standard of income goes down.
  Madam President, $44,570 is the average wage for a job that was lost 
in 2001. And the average wage today, when you get a new job, is 
$35,410, according to this calculation. That is a decline of 21 
percent. When you go from manufacturing and high-technology jobs to 
service jobs, you see a deterioration in the real earnings of the 
American people. That is happening. And we still have a major 
unemployment problem in this country: 8.4 million people, 2 million of 
whom are unemployed on a long-term basis. We have the longest average 
tenure on unemployment we have had in 20 years.
  So, yes, it is a good thing that we saw 308,000 jobs created this 
month. It is a good thing that we are starting to see some pickup. But 
by my calculation--and by anyone's calculation--we still have the worst 
job performance record of any President since Herbert Hoover. Those are 
the facts. People can talk about the facts however they want. We have 
not performed for the American people in creating jobs and creating 
real earnings that will make a difference in their lives.
  So I hope we do not start celebrating and spinning so much that we 
lose track of what the reality is for people in their own lives--
certainly what is the reality for those people in Edison, NJ, who just 
had their Ford plant closed. I can tell you, it is happening all across 
my State. We have seen the elimination of high-quality jobs, and people 
are replacing them with those lower earning ones. I think we have 
serious issues to debate as we go through this campaign season. We 
ought to stay focused on the facts--both the number of jobs created and 
the quality of those jobs. I look forward to having greater discussion 
about these issues in the weeks and months ahead.
  Thank you, Madam President.

                          ____________________